So, I happened upon something disturbing this morning. Glenn Beck of FoxNews fame has been given a new soapbox. Now, I will admit that I am probably more than a little biased against this man, but this strikes me as more than a little worrisome.

It seems that Mr. Beck has created something which he calls "the 9-12 project". Apparently, Beck has determined that the country is in some state of moral decay and that that is the reason behind our financial woes.... or something like that. What it boils down to is that he's begun selling our own asses back to us. He's marketing a support group for fear, and grounding it in blind faith, and even worse, blind patriotism.

The general idea seems to be to return the u.s. to a state of mind similar to the day after 9/11 (i.e. 9/12), and as such, he has created 9 principles and 12 values that supposedly embody the sentiments of that day.

Now, aside from sounding like a cross between John Henry Eden, a self-help speaker, and a televangelist, there are some specifics that bother me about this. For one, his over-acting and pandering to the audience's scripted emotions smells an awful lot like a type of propaganda that I had hoped was dead. It reeks as though he is selling snake oil to the masses. Despite purportedly supporting Honesty, Sincerity and Personal Responsibility, he comes off as disingenuous and tries to lay blame for the current situation squarely on the government. That's not to say that the government isn't partially responsible, but laying the blame solely on them is naive and irresponsible.

Secondly, his idea of democracy seems to be an 'Us against Them" view. He decries the media as surrounding the populace, yet he himself, the man preaching and sobbing in front of you, is a member of that media. He seems to believe that the populace has also been cornered by the "the leaders, and the special interests", as though the people are having to fight their government. It nearly sounds subversive to me. As though he is trying to rile up the masses with fake empathy and overturn our government.

His system of values and principles, at first glance, read like a self-help mantra. His first principle, "america is good", makes it sound as if we are to believe unerringly in the country; that it is capable of no wrongs. It comes off as an active denial of so much that this country has done incorrectly in the past. His second principle, "I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life", sounds just fine. Faith is a good thing for many people. However, it seems that those of us who do not support any organized religion or anyone who does not recognize one God, is apparently not invited to the party.

I could continue to go on, but I think this adequately illustrates my concern. While his intentions seem noble, I doubt his sincerity and his ethical standpoint.

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.

I find the juxtaposition of those two principles highly amusing.

Also:

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.

Not only do I find the rather haphazard capitalization in the first one humorous, but the whole "Believe in God or else! But you know, the whole giving to the poor and all of that stuff.... eh." mentality.

1. America is what her people are. No more no less. So if her people are good America is good. If her people are bad America is bad.

2. My only real complaint here is that this isn't principal number one. Before flaming me for this post please take into account that I am a VERY religious person as many of you know by now. However I'll add on to it this: How you view the nature of reality, be it through religion, science, other, or a combination (probably most people), should be recognized as affecting every other decision you make. It already does, but it should be recognized, so if you're going to count it as a principle you better make it number 1.

3. Agree. Honesty is a virtue that needs to become popular/more popular again. Not only honesty in speech but honesty in action also.
In other words integrity.

4. The words "ultimate authority" make me dubious about accepting this one but again I am VERY religious. I believe that a family is the most fundamental social unit for human beings. Therefore it's reasonable to assume that strong family values contributes to a stronger nation, however I don't think that a government should be subject to the whims of a married couple. I don't know, I don't like the way this one is worded. But strong family values are important and they appear to be at a bit of a premium these days. But I've heard they're making a comeback!

5. I take issue with the phrase "Justice is blind" otherwise I agree no one is above the law if you commit a crime you pay the penalty, of course what that penalty is is the bigger issue. Unless of course you're a foreign diplomat.

6. No disagreements here.

7. The government shouldn't FORCE people to be charitable, no, but I must admit I'm a little lost on what this is particularly in reference too. I imagine welfare and the like or perhaps social security, but still depending on what it's in response to for me to agree or disagree.

8. Completely agree. I think less people should speak without thinking as most people don't have very good instincts in these kinds of matters (myself included). But it's certainly within their right to do so (myself included ).

9. Allow me to rephrase this one: The government works for us. We do not answer to them, they answer to us. Takes some of the self-righteous fanaticism out of it and puts less emphasis on the individual and more on the collective people of the U.S. Now I agree with it.

The values are alright, they all boil down to aspects of duty and brotherly love anyway. Being VERY religious I don't disagree.

And I don't not use double negatives, neither.

Wait a minute... Would the superscript TM placed in the links be something that they added or you added, monsieur le goat? Cause if it was you, then: funny.

But if it was them... What the hell? Is that really necessary?

Last edited by Unclever title on 20 Mar 2009, 11:47, edited 1 time in total.

My train of thought is more like a roller coaster that has loop de loops and no safety bars.
I don't know if I'm tall enough to ride.

And the President's "Change you can believe in" is going to make it impossible for the people who need jobs most to get them, drain on those who actually have jobs, and won't actually change any of Bush's policies that he promised he'd change.

Wow, these guys actually made me sick, I hate that there are people like this, is this a real news program, how can my country who is pretty much hated uniformly to some degree the world over be so insensitive, maybe the stereotypes people have on people from the states should be there, I really can not believe this was aired. I have never wanted to not be seen as a person from the USA before, because I believed that no matter how bad someone else was it shouldn't effect how people feel about me, but seeing as how something like that can get on the air, damn...just damn.

We feel free when we escape--even if it be but from the frying pan into the fire.

Unclever title wrote:Wait a minute... Would the superscript TM placed in the links be something that they added or you added, monsieur le goat? Cause if it was you, then: funny.

But if it was them... What the hell? Is that really necessary?

That was me

So long as we're talking about the president (if somewhat indirectly), I'd like to direct everyone's attention to the opening montage. Shown are Rod Blagojevich, the apparently corrupt and currently on trial ex-governor of Illinois, Bernard Madoff, the orchestrator of a multi-billion dollar ponzi scheme that has ripped off not only investors but charities, and then the Presidential Cabinet at a bill signing.

One of these things is not like the others, one of these things doesn't belong.

Yukikaze wrote:So apparently, it's not OK to hate on Obama, but it is OK to hate on Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other Conservative figurehead?

I'll bother contributing when the hypocrisy is gone from this thread.

While I agree that lavishing un-scrutinized praise upon the president is a bad and clearly wrong path, and he has certainly has made a few mistakes already, he is undoubtedly above the company of those men.

I won't say that the stimulus plans are necessarily what the economy needs because, honestly, I don't know. I do know that he is passing some good legislation and keeping at least a few of his promises, and continuing to talk to and treat americans like adults; something that has been sorely missing for at least 30 years.

Now Glenn Beck on the other hand has well... read the rest of the thread. Rush Limbaugh on the other hand is even more directly antagonistic and pandering to niche constituencies. Few people have the capacity to engender so much controversy (and often idiocy) in a few sentences as Rush.

I'm not saying the president is above criticism, in fact, I think he should probably be held to a higher standard of criticism, but Limbaugh and Beck are openly self-contradictory, inflammatory and infinitely more capable of triggering my gag reflex.

Yukikaze wrote:'twould only be fair. Conservative threads have been locked for less here.

I think you're reading pretty far into this.

1) the thread was started regarding a specific set of statements by a specific individual
2) these statements were found to be ridiculous to some here
3) those who found them ridiculous posted saying as much
4) there was at least one well-thought-out response posted earlier, which agreed with the majority of points made by the individual liked by OP.
5) you jumped in and started shouting about "conservatives" and "liberals" without context, and without adding to the discussion

in conclusion, shut up or contribute, pl0x. Political discussion doesn't all have to be about "OMG YOU DONT THINK THE SAME AS ME HURR," and in fact should not be. read the points made by other posters, state your position, and respond in kind to those who are posting.

Both sides of the political debate have some pretty obvious morons touting them as the truth. I'd say it's pretty much fair game to make fun of the morons, if they say some dumb shit.

The reason I don't watch TV, don't read news websites, and don't listen to news radio is that all news outlets have an agenda which they promote through their networks. I don't want to be a part of it, and I'm tired of listening to it. I live my life as best I can, following the best rules I've found to live my life by; I don't need the approval of a politician to do so, and I don't need a media outlet to tell me to do it that way.

goat wrote:While I agree that lavishing un-scrutinized praise upon the president is a bad and clearly wrong path, and he has certainly has made a few mistakes already, he is undoubtedly above the company of those men.

I do have to give the President credit: he thinks what he's doing is right. So do Beck and Limbaugh. In that vein, there is no difference, yet you demonize the latter and deify the former. What would you say if I started a hatemongering thread about Obama?

Oh wait, I already know what you'd say: "Lock/ban plz."

madAlric wrote:Political discussion doesn't all have to be about "OMG YOU DONT THINK THE SAME AS ME HURR," and in fact should not be.

No, but most of it in this thread has been.

Last edited by Yukikaze on 20 Mar 2009, 12:44, edited 1 time in total.

Yeah, I started to skim these posts after I while. I really don't like Glen Beck, I disagree with the vast majority of what he says. However, he panders to a certain audience that is large enough to support his program. He does things like this to keep them interested, and to enlarge his audience, so he makes more money.

We're not that audience, so can we all please ignore him?

Also: the video making fun of our military makes me sick (I didn't get more than a couple seconds after them making fun of Leslie's name though). The only people allowed to make fun of the Canadian Military and Politics are Canadian Comedians. Everybody else comes off sounding like either an idiot or a douche, and is generally insulting (well, Jon Stewart managed to do it well, but he's a talented comedian, and he knows how to not insult people for no reason). Not to mention that by the sounds of where that video was going, they had absolutely no idea of what was actually going on, and just decided to rip on Canada for no reason.

TheRocket wrote:Apparently the crotch area could not contain the badonkadonk area.

Yuki, if you have nothing more constructive to add to this than a wounded, self-righteous, persecution complex then don't participate.

And, in keeping with that, you're posting on a message board run by candians, who themselves identify as left-leaning for canadians on a board populated predominantly by youg, liberal folks. Consiider your audience. If you want to post some ultra-conservative view of the universe and have it taken seriously, perhaps you should consider taking it to, you know, a conservative political site? You're not going to get the balanced treatment of your political views that you seem to think you deserve here, because most of the people here don't share them, and to some of us you come off as a paranoid, ultra-conservative nutjob (and I mean that in the nicest way possible).

So either understand that you're arguing with the wrong audience and take your comments elsewhere, or keep posting here, but understand that it's unlikely you'll find many sympathetic ears, and get over it.

You lean WAY right of even most of the right-wingers on this board. bear that in mind.